Eritrea

Lord Avebury: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What representations they have made to the Government of Eritrea about the incommunicado detention of 11 persons since 19 September.

Baroness Amos: On 25 September FCO officials called in the Eritrean Ambassador to London to protest at the actions of Eritrean Government and pressed for the immediate release of all those detained and the restoration of the independent press. I issued a public statement on 27 September expressing the Government's dismay over the recent events in Eritrea.
	The EU protested collectively on 28 September when the Italian Ambassador to Eritrea, in his capacity as the local presidency, carried out an EU demarche on the Minister for Foreign Affairs. Later the same day the Italian Ambassador was expelled. We and our EU partners protested to the Eritreans. EU heads of mission to Asmara were subsequently recalled.
	At the EU's Africa Working Group Meeting in October partners agreed that the heads of mission would only return to Asmara once President Issayas had agreed to meet them to discuss the EU's concerns. However, with no movement from the Eritreans, the EU presidency subsequently proposed the return of heads of missions in an attempt to secure a call locally. The heads of mission returned to Asmara in the week beginning 5 November.
	On 23 November EU heads of mission met Issayas to discuss the internal situation and prospects for EU/Eritrea relations. Issayas was unrepentant and resisted any discussion of Eritrea's internal situation.
	With our EU partners we are looking at further options to encourage the Eritrean Government to revise their position.

Firearms Control Protocol

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What support, either bilateral or multilateral, will be given to help to implement the protocol on firearms control, signed in Malawi in August 2001.

Baroness Amos: The Southern Africa Development Community Protocol on the Control of Firearms, Ammunition and Other Related Materials is yet to be agreed by all 14 SADC member states. Angola is the only SADC country yet to sign the protocol. It is expected to sign shortly.
	The UK Government have been supporting the development of this protocol indirectly through the funding they provide to the British Non-Governmental Organisation Saferworld. Support for Saferworld dates back to 1998 when we provided funds for a meeting of officials from the EU and SADC which led to the agreement of the Southern Africa Action Programme on Light Arms and Illicit Trafficking. The UK has since provided support to Saferworld for research into the small arms problem in Southern Africa and for the facilitation of meetings of officials from SADC countries to assist in the development of the protocol.
	Once the protocol is signed by all SADC countries the UK will consider ways that we might support its implementation, at both the bilateral and multilateral level, through the joint DfID, FCO and MoD Global Conflict Prevention Pool Small Arms and Light Weapons Programme.

UN Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What was the outcome of the Review Conference for the United Nations Convention on Certain Conventional Weapons which was held in December 2001; and, if the conference had to be postponed, what their objectives will be when it is eventually held.

Baroness Amos: The review conference concluded its work on 21 December 2001. The states parties to the convention took a number of decisions, which are set out in the final declaration of the conference. They agreed, inter alia, to extend the scope of application of the convention to cover non-international armed conflicts; to establish a group of governmental experts to discuss ways and means to address the issue of explosive remnants of war and to explore the issue of mines other than anti-personnel mines; and to consult on possible options to promote compliance with the convention and its annexed protocols. The outcome of the group's discussions during 2002 will be presented at a meeting of the states parties in December.

Afghanistan

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What steps they are taking to ensure that difficulties already experienced in getting access for food supplies to the remoter areas of Afghanistan are overcome; and whether they expect this to be done before the end of the winter.

Baroness Amos: With our assistance, the UN, under the leadership of the World Food Programme, is maximising food delivery through both road and air routes and is prioritising deliveries to areas where access may become more difficult over the continuing winter, including the Central Highlands, the Panjshir valley and the north-east of the country. It has deployed specialist equipment and personnel to keep routes to these areas open as long as possible.
	However, due to severe weather conditions and continuing security concerns in some isolated areas of the country, there may still be pockets of unmet needs where vulnerable people cannot be reached. WFP and other humanitarian agencies will continue to do what they can over coming months to overcome these obstacles and deliver life-saving assistance to those in need.

Suspected Terrorists: Decisions on Extradition to Stand Trial

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they will ensure that suspected terrorists are not extradited to a requesting state to face trial for a terrorist offence before a tribunal that fails to satisfy the requirements for a fair trial of Article 6 of the European Convention on Human Rights, Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

Lord Rooker: Any decision to order a fugitive's surrender to stand trial is taken with full regard to the United Kingdom's international obligations.

Criminal Compensation

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What amount of criminal compensation has been paid since 1994, following convictions for sexual offences based on uncorroborated allegations; and whether they will review the justification for such payments.

Lord Rooker: Where a court of law, having considered all the evidence presented to it, has found that a person named in an indictment as the victim of alleged sexual abuse was beyond reasonable doubt the victim of that crime, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Authority (CICA) and, where appropriate, the Criminal Injuries Compensation Appeals Panel (CICAP) would not normally question the nature of the evidence on which that finding was based. For this and other reasons the statistics the noble Lord seeks are not available.
	In determining eligibility for criminal injuries compensation, CICA and CICAP seek to establish whether, on the balance of probabilities, the applicant has been the blameless victim of a crime of violence such as sexual abuse.
	Where a court has found beyond reasonable doubt that the person was the victim of a crime of violence, CICA and CICAP would not normally be expected to reach a different conclusion on the balance of probabilities.

Balkans: Small Arms Proliferation

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they consider that the Special Coordinator of the Stability Pact for South-East Europe has sufficient staff and resources to prevent trading and proliferation of small arms in the whole Balkan region; and, if not, what proposals they will make.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The international community is active in this area, with several donor states supporting work to combat small arms and light weapons (SALW) proliferation. For its part, the stability pact is establishing a regional SALW clearinghouse in Belgrade under the auspices of the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). This is a significant contribution to the overall effort. Her Majesty's Government are providing core funding of £426,000 to UNDP's Global Weapons Collection, Management and Destruction Programme to support the establishment of the clearinghouse and its operation.

Balkans: Small Arms Proliferation

Lord Hylton: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether the weapons destruction facility in Kosovo will be kept open with a view to serving neighbouring countries.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The weapons destruction facility near Pristina was set up with support from the UK and Norway in 1999 and has destroyed over 8,500 weapons. Further funding has now been offered by the Dutch Government to ensure that this facility can continue to operate in 2002. No neighbouring country has yet requested use of the facility. Local destruction may be more efficient and more secure. Weapons surrendered to the British-led Task Force Harvest in Macedonia last year, for example, were destroyed in Macedonia.

European Union: Forthcoming Council Business

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What is the forthcoming business in the Council of the European Union for January, and what are the major European Union events for the period between 31 January and June 2002.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: Please see attached.
	January
	10 Brussels: Fisheries Council
	17 Brussels: Budget Council (Ev)
	21 Brussels: Eurogroup (Evening)
	21–22 Brussels: Agriculture Council
	22 Brussels: ECOFIN
	25–26 Brussels: Meeting of Employment Ministers (Ministerial Informal)
	28–29 Brussels: General Affairs Council
	The following are the principal events in the EU between 1 February and June 2002 (certain relevant events are also included: the list is based on the information available at the date of issue).
	
		
			 Date Venue 
			 February 
			 6–7 Valladolid Ministerial Seminar on Democracy  and Development 
			 9–10 Brussels Gymnich (Ministerial Informal) 
			 11 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 14 Brussels Education and Youth Council 
			 14–15 Brussels Justice and Home Affairs Council  (Ministerial Informal) 
			 18–19 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 18–19 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 22–23 Brussels Telecoms and Information Society  Council (Ministerial Informal) 
			 28 Brussels Justice and Home Affairs Council 
			 March 
			 1 Brussels Justice and Home Affairs Council  (Evening) 
			 1 Brussels Internal Market, Consumers and  Tourism Council 
			 4 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 5 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 7 Brussels Employment and Social Affairs  Council 
			 11 Brussels Research Council 
			 11–12 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 15–16 Barcelona European Council 
			 18–19 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 21 Brussels Environment 
			 23–24 Brussels Defence Ministers Meeting  (Ministerial Informal) 
			 25–26 Brussels Transport and Telecom Council 
			 27–28 Monterrey,  Mexico Financing and Development  Conference 
			 April 
			 5–6 Luxembourg Migrations Council (ASEM  Ministerial Informal) 
			 8 Luxembourg Fisheries Council 
			 13–14 Luxembourg ECOFIN (Ministerial Informal) 
			 15–16 Luxembourg General Affairs Council 
			 22–23 Valencia Euromed Conference 
			 22–23 Luxembourg Agriculture Council 
			 25–26 Luxembourg Justice and Home Affairs Council 
			 27–30 Luxembourg Agriculture Council (Ministerial  Informal) 
			 May 
			 3–4 Brussels Tourism Council (Ministerial  Informal) 
			 6 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 7 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 9  Europe Day 
			 13 Brussels General Affairs Council with  Defence Ministers 
			 17–18 Madrid EU-LAC Summit 
			 21 Brussels Internal Market, Consumers and  Tourism Council 
			 23 Brussels Culture and Audio-visual Council 
			 24–26 Brussels Environment Council (Ministerial  Informal) 
			 27–28 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 30 Brussels Development Council 
			 30 Brussels Education and Youth Council 
			 31–1 June Brussels Transport Council (Ministerial  Informal) 
			 June 
			 3 Brussels Employment and Social Affairs  Council 
			 3 Brussels Eurogroup (Evening) 
			 4 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 6–8 Brussels Foreign Affairs Council (ASEM  Ministers) 
			 6–7 Brussels Industry and Energy Council 
			 10–11 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 10–11 Brussels Agriculture Council 
			 11 Brussels Fisheries Council 
			 13–14 Brussels Justice and Home Affairs Council 
			 17–18 Brussels Transport and Telecom Council 
			 17–18 Brussels General Affairs Council 
			 21–22 Seville European Council 
			 24 Brussels General Affairs Council (Possible) 
			 24–25 Brussels Environment Council 
			 25 Brussels ECOFIN 
			 26 Brussels Health Council

Convention on the Future of Europe

Baroness Massey of Darwen: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What arrangements will be made to select the United Kingdom's national parliamentary representatives to the Convention on the Future of Europe.

Baroness Symons of Vernham Dean: The other place will be given the opportunity to debate a Motion nominating members to the convention, and your Lordships' House will be given the opportunity to debate such a Motion subject to agreement between the usual channels.

Environmental Statements

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	How many applications for consent they expect will be made during 2002 under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Uncultivated Land and Semi-natural Areas) (England) Regulations 2001 (S.I. 2001/3966); how many additional staff will be required to administer the regulations; and what is the amount included for this work in the relevant budget line of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs budget; and
	Whether, under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Uncultivated Land and Semi-natural Areas) England Regulations 2001 (S.I. 2001/3966), the selection criteria for the screening decision, the required information for inclusion in the environmental statements and the criteria used for consent decisions in each case will include and take account of any proposed loss of open country (and therefore access land) under the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000.

Lord Whitty: The resource requirements for implementing the regulations will depend on the number and types of applications for consent. Costs will be met from the overall funding available to the department, which remains to be allocated for 2002–03.
	Schedule 1 to the regulations lists the criteria to be taken into account in deciding whether a project is likely to have significant environmental effects for which an environmental statement is required. Guidelines on applying these criteria, which are to be published shortly, list factors which will be taken into account, as appropriate, and include "any public rights of way or public access, commons or other open spaces used by the public". The required information for inclusion in the environmental statement, on which consent decisions will be based, will depend on the degree of significance of the various factors in individual cases.

Waste Recycling

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What levels of waste recycling have been achieved in each local authority; what targets they have set these authorities for the future; and how, in detail, they define "waste" and "recycling" in relation to this.

Lord Whitty: The latest data available (for 1999–2000) on the percentage of household waste recycled in each waste collection and waste disposal authority are available in the Library of the House. This table also gives the statutory performance standards for 2003–04 and 2005–06 for the recycling and composting of household waste for each authority.
	Data for 2000–01 are currently being collated from local authorities.
	These percentages and standards relate to household waste. This is defined as all waste collected by waste collection authorities under Section 45(1)(a) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, plus all waste arising from civic amenity sites, and waste collected by third parties for which collection or disposal recycling credits are payable under Section 52 of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
	"Recycled" means reprocessed in a production process for the original purpose, or for other purposes, but excluding energy recovery.
	"Composted" means the controlled biological decomposition and stabilisation of organic substrates, under conditions that are predominantly aerobic and that allow the development of thermophilic temperatures as a result of biologically produced heat. This includes composting undertaken at a central or community composting facility. Home composting is not included. The tonnage to be used in calculation is the material sent for composting to these facilities.

Waste Recycling

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether building waste and composting of garden waste are components of the recycling target; and, if not, why not.

Lord Whitty: Statutory performance standards for recycling and composting by local authorities, set under the best value regime, relate to household waste, and therefore building waste and other non-household waste is not included. However, the Government's Waste Strategy 2000 set a separate target of reducing, by 2005, the amount of industrial and commercial waste sent to landfill to 85 per cent of that landfilled in 1998 to encourage businesses to reduce waste.
	Garden waste is included in the calculation of the recycling/composting target if it is composted at a central or community composting facility. Home composting is not included as it is not collected by the collection authority and the amounts of waste composted are therefore very difficult to determine.

Waste Recycling

Lord Lucas: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What quantity of composted recycled garden waste they expect to be generated annually by local authorities over the next five years; and what is the current market for such material.

Lord Whitty: Figures from the Defra Municipal Waste Management Survey show there have been substantial increases in the amount of household waste collected for composting by local authorities in England and Wales: from 462,000 tonnes in 1998–99 to 670,000 tonnes in 1999–2000. Local authorities have statutory performance targets which require them to double the overall recycling and composting rate by 2003–04 and treble it by 2005–06.
	The Composting Association estimates that the potential market for compost is in excess of 20 million tonnes per annum, with significant potential in the agriculture sector.

Pennine Cycleway

Lord Greaves: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	What progress is being made on the creation of the proposed Pennine cycleway; and what are the targets for achievement in 2002.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The Pennine cycleway is part of the National Cycle Network being promoted by the transport charity Sustrans. The responsibility for progressing the network rests with Sustrans, not with central government.
	Progress on the Pennine cycleway was delayed by the foot and mouth epidemic last year. I understand that Sustrans has recently received a rural recovery grant of £110,000 from the Countryside Agency for the Pennine cycleway. This should enable progress to be made on the completion of a number of missing links in the cycleway during the early part of 2002.

Street Works

Earl Attlee: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the speech by Lord Filkin on 19 December 2001 (HL Deb, col. 346), where in the Street Works (Charges for Occupation of the Highway) (England) Regulations 2001 it is made clear that the "duration of the works" referred to in paragraph 5(4) is measured in days rather than hours or weeks.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My noble friend Lord Filkin wrote to the noble Earl on this matter on 10 January 2002. A copy of his letter has been placed in the Library of the House. As this explains, the intention is that, for the purposes of any lane rental schemes to be operated under the regulations, the charges referred to will apply per day for which each street works last. While "duration" is not defined in the regulations in this way, it will be made clear in the orders which the Secretary of State needs to make to allow each authority to operate a lane rental scheme that the charges are to be daily ones.

Bus Lane Contravention

Lord Bradshaw: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Whether they are in a position to give a date by which consultation will commence under Section 144 of the Transport Act 2000 to enable local authorities outside London which have decriminalised parking enforcement status to impose penalty charges in respect of bus lane contravention, using camera enforcement.

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: Drafting of the regulations is still in progress. We must also consult the Lord Chancellor's Department and the Home Office on the drafts. We are pressing on with preparation of the regulations as quickly as possible, but in the circumstances I cannot give a specific date by which public consultations will commence.

Bristol Royal Infirmary

Baroness Gale: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When they will publish the response to the report of the public inquiry into children's heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984–1995.

Lord Hunt of Kings Heath: We have today published our response to the Kennedy Report (Learning from Bristol: The Department of Health's Response to the Report of the Public Inquiry into children's heart surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984–1995—Cm 5363) and copies are available in the Library and the Printed Paper Office.

Language Learning: Ministers and Officials

Baroness Ludford: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Which (a) Ministers and (b) officials took lessons in foreign languages as part of the European Year of Languages in 2001; whether any formal qualifications were obtained as a result; and, if so, by whom.

Baroness Ashton of Upholland: We do not hold information centrally on the number of Ministers and officials who have taken lessons in foreign languages. However, from data collected by the Centre for Information on Language Teaching and Research we know that 35 cross-party MPs signed up to the Language Challenge as part of the European Year of Languages. The purpose of the Language Challenge was to demonstrate a positive attitude towards language learning and cultural awareness rather than to gain formal qualifications. Each person was free to set his or her own goal, with the emphasis being on participation, rather than assessed results.
	Staff within the DfES are encouraged to learn languages, both for their personal development and to support work-related need. A series of themed events were held within the department during the European Year of Languages.

Equality of Treatment: Election Candidates

Lord Lester of Herne Hill: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	Further to the Written Answer by the Lord Privy Seal on 17 December (WA 32), whether they consider that a qualifying registered party, within the meaning of Part II of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000, is a body certain of whose functions are of a public nature, within the meaning of Section 6(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998, in selecting and nominating persons to stand for election in the name of that party in that the function is "quasi-governmental in nature" and "seeks to achieve some collective benefit for the public"; and, if not, why not.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: The Government have previously expressed their view that the selection of candidates for election by political parties is not a public function within the meaning of Section 6(3) of the Human Rights Act 1998.
	The requirement for political parties to register in order to take part in certain elections by virtue of Part II of the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 does not make the function of selecting candidates by those parties a public one.
	The Government do not consider the selection of candidates to be a function that is quasi-governmental in nature. A political party no doubt regards itself as acting in the public interest by selecting a candidate for election. Activities which are motivated by the public interest, however, are not necessarily public functions seeking to achieve some collective benefit for the public. As the Court of Appeal has recently made clear, the fact that an organisation is motivated in performing its activities by what it perceives to be the public interest does not point to the body being a public authority.
	The Government's view is that the selection of a candidate to stand for election is internal to the party. Even if the party is motivated by the public interest in undertaking this function, this does not alter its character from a function that is political in nature into one that is public in nature.
	There is, however, no binding authority from the court on the point. Until there is, the Government must take a view on the matter based on their interpretation of the law, but this does not mean that there is no room for differing views.

Chief Surveillance Commissioner's Report

Lord Orme: asked Her Majesty's Government:
	When the annual report of the Chief Surveillance Commissioner appointed under Section 91(1)(a) of the Police Act 1997 will be laid before the House.

Lord Williams of Mostyn: A copy of Sir Andrew Leggatt's report for 2000 is being laid before the House today in accordance with Section 107(3) of the Police Act 1997 (as amended by the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000). After consultation with the Chief Surveillance Commissioner, material in an annex to a report has been excluded from that copy under Section 107(4) of the Act because its publication would be prejudicial to the prevention or detection of serious crime.
	For the first time the annual report covers Part II of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000.